Advertisement

Researching Curriculum, Policy and Leadership in Mathematics Education

  • Jennifer Way
  • Janette Bobis
  • Janeen Lamb
  • Joanna Higgins
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter reviews research regarding the official mathematics curriculum and its enactment, the educational leadership to support this enactment, and the associated influential policy, such as national testing. It explores the interrelationships between inherent issues such as the potential influence of textbooks, curriculum equity, and the complexities of implementing numeracy across disciplines. Substantial research has led to the development of robust theoretical models to inform both future research and practical developments across a range of aspects of curriculum, policy and leadership. However, the seemingly diverse research perspectives are all drawn towards the teacher in the classroom as the critical context for further research.

Keywords

Curriculum Policy Leadership 

References

  1. ACARA—Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2015a). The Australian Curriculum (Version 7.5–21 May 2015). Retrieved July 4 2015 from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/.
  2. ACARA. (2015b). Australian Curriculum: Mathematics (Version 7.5–21 May 2015). Retrieved July 4 2015 from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/mathematics/rationale.
  3. ACARA. (2015c). Improving the Australian Curriculum–8 May 2015. Retrieved July 4 2015 from http://www.acara.edu.au/news_media/acara_news/acara_news_2015_05.html#201505181.
  4. ACARA. (2015d). National Assessment Program. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu.au/.
  5. Anderson, J. (2014). Forging new opportunities for problem solving in Australian mathematics classrooms through the first national mathematics curriculum. In Y. Li & G. Lappan (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum in school education (pp. 209–229). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-7560-2_11.
  6. Anderson, J., White, P., & Wong, M. (2012). Mathematics curriculum in the schooling years. In B. Perry, T. Lowrie, T. Logan, A. McDonald, & J. Greenlees (Eds.), Research in mathematics education in Australasia 2008-2011 (pp. 219–244). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ashhurst, C., & Gaffney, M. (2014). Connecting school and system perspectives in numeracy. In M. Gaffney & R. Faragher (Eds.), Leading improvements in student numeracy (pp. 3–23). Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  8. Atweh, B., & Goos, M. (2011). The Australian mathematics curriculum: A move forward or back to the future. Australian Journal of Education, 55(3), 214–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Atweh, B., Miller, D., & Thornton, S. (2012). The Australian curriculum: Mathematics–World class or Déjà vu. In B. Atweh, M. Goos, R. Jorgensen, & D. Siemon, (Eds.), Engaging the Australian Curriculum Mathematics–Perspectives from the field (pp. 1–18). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. Retrieved from http://www.merga.net.au/onlinebooks.
  10. Batiste, W., Walker, S., & Smeed, J. (2015). The relationship between teachers’ perceptions of school leadership and their perceptions of the implementation of the national curriculum. Leading and Managing, 21(1), 69–85.Google Scholar
  11. Bennison, A. (2015). Supporting teachers to embed numeracy across the curriculum: A sociocultural approach. ZDM, 47(4), 561–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Branson, C. M. (2009). Leadership for an age of wisdom. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Branson, C. M. (2010). Leading educational change wisely. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Chick, H., & Pierce, R. (2013). The statistical literacy needed to interpret school assessment data. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 15(2), 5–26.Google Scholar
  15. Callingham, R., Beswick, K., & Ferme, E. (2015). An initial exploration of teachers’ numeracy in the context of professional capital. ZDM, 47, 549–560. doi: 10.1007/s11858-015-0666-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Debritz, C., & Horne, R. (2013). Guided inquiry as a model for curriculum resources in mathematics. In V. Steinle, L. Ball, & C. Bardini (Eds.), Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 763–766). Melbourne: MERGA.Google Scholar
  17. Ditchburn, D. (2012). A national Australian curriculum: In whose interests? Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 32(3), 259–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Edmonds-Wathen, C. (2013). Great expectations: Teaching mathematics in English to indigenous language speaking students. In V. Steinle, L. Ball, & C. Bardini (Eds.), Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 266–273). Melbourne: MERGA.Google Scholar
  19. Education Review Office. (2011). Directions for Learning: The New Zealand curriculum principles, and teaching as inquiry. Retrieved from http://www.ero.govt.nz/National-Reports.
  20. Education Review Office. (2013). Mathematics in Years 4 to 8: Developing a responsive curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.ero.govt.nz/National-Reports.
  21. Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: Development status and directions. ZDM, 45, 633–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Faragher, R., Gaffney, M., & Skoss, M. (2014). Articulating purposes and practices in numeracy development. In M. Gaffney & R. Faragher (Eds.), Leading improvements in student numeracy (pp. 167–180). Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  23. Gaffney, M. (2012). Leadership capabilities for developing numeracy. Australian Educational Leader, 34(2), 30–35.Google Scholar
  24. Gaffney, M., Clarke, D., & Faragher, R. (2014a). The numeracy challenge: Student achievement, teacher quality, school leadership and system policy. In M. Gaffney & R. Faragher (Eds.), Leading improvements in student numeracy (pp. 3–23). Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  25. Gaffney, M., Faragher, R., & Clarke, D. (2014b). Embedding numeracy development. In M. Gaffney & R. Faragher (Eds.), Leading improvements in student numeracy (pp. 181–199). Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  26. Geiger, V., Goos, M., & Dole, S. (2014). Curriculum intent, teacher professional development and student learning in numeracy. In Y. Li & G. Lappan (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum in school education (pp. 473–492). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Geiger, V., Goos, M., & Forgasz, H. (2015). A critical orientation to numeracy across the curriculum. ZDM, 47(4), 611–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gerrard, J., Albright, J., Clarke, D. J., Clarke, D. M., Farrell, L., Freebody, P., & Sullivan, P. (2013). Researching the creation of a national curriculum from systems to classrooms. Australian Journal of Education, 57(1), 60–73. doi: 10.1177/0004944112471480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Goos, M., Dole, S., & Geiger, V. (2011). Improving numeracy education in rural schools: A professional development approach. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 23(2), 129–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Goos, M., Dole, S., & Geiger, V. (2012a). Auditing the numeracy demands of the Australian curriculum. In J. Dindyal, L. P. Chen, & S. F. Ng (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 314–321). Singapore: MERGA.Google Scholar
  31. Goos, M., Dole, S., & Geiger, V. (2012b). Numeracy across the curriculum. Australian Mathematics Teacher, 68(1), 3–7.Google Scholar
  32. Hardy, I. (2015). A logic of enumeration: The nature and effects of national literacy and numeracy testing in Australia. Journal of Education Policy, 30(3), 335–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hudson, P., Spooner-Lane, R., & Murray, M. (2013). Making mentoring explicit: Articulating pedagogical knowledge practices. School Leadership and Management, 33(3), 284–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jorgensen, R. (2012). Curriculum leadership: Reforming and reshaping successful practice in remote and regional Indigenous education. In J. Dindyal, L. Chen, & S. Ng (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 370–377). Singapore: MERGA.Google Scholar
  35. Jorgensen, R. (2015a). Successful mathematics lessons in remote communities: A case study of Balargo. In M. Marshman, V. Geiger, & A. Bennison (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 317–324). Sunshine Coast, QLD: MERGA.Google Scholar
  36. Jorgensen, R. (2015b). Mathematical success in culturally diverse mathematics classrooms. In S. Mukhopadhyay & B. Greer (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth Mathematics Education and Society Conference (pp. 670–683). Portland, OR: Ooligan Press.Google Scholar
  37. Jorgensen, R., & Perso, T. (2012). Equity and the Australian curriculum: Mathematics. In B. Atweh, M. Goos, R. Jorgensen, & D. Siemon (Eds.). Engaging the Australian Curriculum Mathematics—Perspectives from the field (pp. 115–133). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. Retrieved from http://www.merga.net.au/onlinebooks.
  38. Kaur, B. (2014). Enactment of school mathematics curriculum in Singapore: Wither research! ZDM, 46, 829–836.Google Scholar
  39. Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P., & Bristol, L. (Eds.). (2014). Changing education, changing practices. Singapore: Springer Education.Google Scholar
  40. Lamb, J., & Branson, C. (2015). Educational change leadership through a New Zonal Theory Lens: Using mathematics curriculum change as the example. Policy Futures in Education, 13(8), 1010–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lange, T., & Meaney, T. (2014). It’s just as well kids don’t vote: The positioning of children through public discourse around national testing. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26, 377–397. doi: 10.1007/s13394-013-0094.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Leder, G. (2012). Mathematics for all? The case for and against national testing. In S. J. Cho (Ed.), Intellectual and attitudinal challenges: Proceedings of the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 189–207). Seoul, Korea: Springer Open. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-12688-3_14.
  43. Leung, F. K. S. (2014). What can and should we learn from international studies of mathematics achievement? Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(3), 579–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McMurchy-Pilkington, C., Trinick, T., & Meaney, T. (2013). Mathematics curriculum development and indigenous language revitalisation: Contested spaces. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 25(3), 341–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Meaney, T., Trinick, T., & Fairhall, U. (2013). One size does not fit all: Achieving equity in Maori mathematics classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(1), 235–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Miller, J., & Warren, E. (2014). Exploring ESL students’ understanding of mathematics in the early years: Factors that make a difference. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(4), 791–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ministry of Education. (2007). New Zealand Curriculum for English-medium teaching and learning in years 1–13. Retrieved from http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum.
  48. Ministry of Education. (2011). Position paper: Assessment (schooling sector). Wellington, NZ: Learning Media Limited. Retrieved from http://assessment.tki.org.nz/Media/Files/Ministry-of-Education-Position-Paper-Assessment-Schooling-Sector-2011.
  49. Özerk, K., & Whitehead, D. (2012). The impact of national standards assessment in New Zealand, and national testing protocols in Norway on indigenous schooling. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(3), 545–561.Google Scholar
  50. Polesel, J., Dulfer, N., & Turnbull, M. (2012). The experience of education: The impacts of high stakes testing on school students and their familiesA review of literature. The Whitlam Institute: Sydney. Retrieved from http://whitlam.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/276191/High_Stakes_Testing_Literature_Review.pdf.
  51. Polesel, J., Rice, S., & Dulfer, N. (2014). The impact of high-stakes testing on curriculum and pedagogy: A teacher perspective from Australia. Journal of Education Policy, 29(5), 640–657. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2013.865082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rafiepour Gatabi, A., Stacey, K., & Gooya, Z. (2012). Investigating grade nine textbook problems for characteristics related to mathematical literacy. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 24(4), 403–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rampal, A., & Makar, K. (2012). Embedding authenticity and cultural relevance in the primary mathematics curriculum. In S. Cho (Ed.), Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 6616–6625). Seoul, Korea: ICME.Google Scholar
  54. Remillard, J. T., & Heck, D. (2014). Conceptualizing the curriculum enactment process in mathematics education. ZDM, 46(5), 705–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership for the twenty-first century (2nd ed.). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  56. Schmidt, W., McKnight, C., Houang, R., Wang, H., Wiley, D., Cogan, L., & Wolfe, R. (2002). Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  57. Shield, M., & Dole, S. (2013). Assessing the potential of mathematics textbooks to promote deep learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(2), 183–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sexton, M., & Downton, A. (2014). School mathematics leaders’ perceptions of successes and challenges of their leadership role within a mathematics improvement project. In J. Anderson, M. Cavanagh, & A. Prescott (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 581–588). Sydney: MERGA.Google Scholar
  59. Siemon, D., Bleckly, J., & Neal, D. (2012). Working with the big ideas in number and the Australian curriculum: Mathematics. In B. Atweh, M. Goos, R. Jorgensen, & D. Siemon, (Eds.). (2012). Engaging the Australian Curriculum Mathematics–Perspectives from the field (pp. 19–45). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. Retrieved from http://www.merga.net.au/onlinebooks.
  60. Stephens, M. (2014). The Australian curriculum: Mathematics–How did it come about? What challenges does it present for teachers and for teaching mathematics? In Y. Li & G. Lappan (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum in school education (pp. 157–176). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-7560-2_9.
  61. Sullivan, P. (2012). The Australian curriculum: Mathematics as an opportunity to support teachers and improve student learning. In B. Atweh, M. Goos, R. Jorgensen, & D. Siemon (Eds.). Engaging the Australian Curriculum in Mathematics—Perspectives from the field (pp. 175–189). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. Retrieved from http://www.merga.net.au/onlinebooks.
  62. Sullivan, P., Clarke, D. J., Clarke, D. M., Farrell, L., & Gerrard, J. (2013). Processes and priorities in planning mathematics teaching. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 25(4), 457–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sullivan, P., Mousley, J., & Zevenbergen, R. (2004). Describing elements of mathematics lessons that accommodate diversity in student background. In M. Johnsen Joines & A. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 257–265). Bergen, Norway: PME.Google Scholar
  64. Thompson, D. R., & Huntley, M. A. (2014). Researching the enacted mathematics curriculum: Learning from various perspectives on enactment. ZDM, 46(5), 701–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Walshaw, M., & Openshaw, R. (2011). Mathematics curriculum change: Parliamentary discussion over the past two decades. Curriculum Matters, 7, 8–25.Google Scholar
  66. Warren, E., & Quine, J. (2013). A holistic approach to supporting the learning of young Indigenous students: One case study. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 42(1), 12–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Watson, J., & Neal, D. (2012). Preparing students for decision-making in the 21st century- Statistics and probability in the Australian Curriculum: Mathematics. In B. Atweh, M. Goos, R. Jorgensen, & D. Siemon, (Eds.), Engaging the Australian Curriculum Mathematics—Perspectives from the field (pp. 89–18). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. Retrieved from http://www.merga.net.au/onlinebooks.
  68. Wyn, J., Turnbull, M., & Grimshaw. (2014). The experience of education: The impacts of high stakes testing on school students and their familiesA qualitative study. The Whitlam Institute: Sydney. Retrieved from http://whitlam.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/694199/The_experience_of_education_-_Qualitative_Study.pdf.
  69. Yates, L. (2013). Revisiting curriculum, the numbers game and the inequality problem. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(1), 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zhang, Q., & Stephens, M. (2013). Utilising a construct of teacher capacity to examine national curriculum reform in mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 25(4), 488–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zmood, S. (2014). Fostering the promise of high achieving mathematics students through curriculum differentiation. In J. Anderson, M. Cavanagh, & A. Prescott (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 677–684). Sydney: MERGA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jennifer Way
    • 1
  • Janette Bobis
    • 2
  • Janeen Lamb
    • 3
  • Joanna Higgins
    • 4
  1. 1.University of SydneyNSWAustralia
  2. 2.University of SydneyNSWAustralia
  3. 3.Australian Catholic UniversityBrisbaneAustralia
  4. 4.Victoria University of WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations